minutes of 653rd meeting of the rural and new town ......town planning board minutes of 653rd...

TOWN PLANNING BOARD

Minutes of 653rd Meeting of the

Rural and New Town Planning Committee held at 2:30 p.m. on 1.9.2020

Present

Director of Planning Chairman

Mr Raymond K.W. Lee

Mr Stephen L.H. Liu Vice-chairman

Mr Peter K.T. Yuen

Mr Philip S.L. Kan

Mr K.K. Cheung

Dr C.H. Hau

Dr Lawrence K.C. Li

Miss Winnie W.M. Ng

Mr K.W. Leung

Dr Jeanne C.Y. Ng

Dr Venus Y.H. Lun

Mr Conrad T.C. Wong

Mr Y.S. Wong

- 2 -

Chief Traffic Engineer/New Territories West,

Transport Department

Mr B.K. Chow

Chief Engineer (Works), Home Affairs Department

Mr Gavin C.T. Tse

Principal Environmental Protection Officer (Strategic Assessment),

Environmental Protection Department

Mr Stanley C.F. Lau

Assistant Director/Regional 3,

Lands Department

Mr Alan K.L. Lo

Deputy Director of Planning/District Secretary

Miss Fiona S.Y. Lung

Absent with Apologies

Mr L.T. Kwok

Mr Ricky W.Y. Yu

In Attendance

Assistant Director of Planning/Board

Ms Lily Y.M. Yam

Chief Town Planner/Town Planning Board

Ms Caroline T.Y. Tang

Town Planner/Town Planning Board

Miss Kirstie Y.L. Law

- 3 -

Opening Remarks

1. The Chairman said that the meeting would be conducted with video conferencing

arrangement.

Agenda Item 1

Matters Arising

[Open Meeting]

2. The Secretary reported that there were no matters arising.

- 4 -

Sha Tin, Tai Po and North District

Agenda Item 2

Section 12A Application

[Open Meeting]

Y/ST/45 Application for Amendment to the Approved Sha Tin Outline Zoning

Plan No. S/ST/34, To rezone the application site from “Village Type

Development” to “Government, Institution or Community (1)”, Lots

63, 296 (Part), 331 RP (Part) and 393 S.B RP (Part) in D.D. 185,

Sheung Wo Che No. 198, Sha Tin

(RNTPC Paper No. Y/ST/45)

3. The Secretary reported that the application was to rezone a site from “Village

Type Development” to “Government, Institution or Community (1)” to continue the religious

institution and columbarium use on site. Mr K.K. Cheung had declared an interest on the

item for his firm being the legal advisor of the Private Columbaria Licensing Board.

4. The Committee noted that the applicant had requested deferment of consideration

of the application. As the interest of Mr K.K. Cheung was indirect, the Committee agreed

that he could stay in the meeting.

5. The Committee noted that the applicant’s representative requested on 2.7.2020

deferment of consideration of the application for two months in order to allow time for

preparation of further information to address departmental and public comments. It was the

first time that the applicant requested deferment of the application.

6. After deliberation, the Committee decided to defer a decision on the application

as requested by the applicant pending the submission of further information from the

applicant. The Committee agreed that the application should be submitted for its

consideration within three months from the date of receipt of further information from the

applicant. If the further information submitted by the applicant was not substantial and

could be processed within a shorter time, the application could be submitted to an earlier

- 5 -

meeting for the Committee’s consideration. The Committee also agreed to advise the

applicant that two months were allowed for preparation of the submission of the further

information, and no further deferment would be granted unless under very special

circumstances.

Fanling, Sheung Shui and Yuen Long East District

Agenda Item 3


[Open Meeting]

Y/NE-KTS/13 Application for Amendment to the Approved Kwu Tung South Outline

Zoning Plan No. S/NE-KTS/16, To amend the Notes of the

“Comprehensive Development Area” Zone on the Approved Kwu

Tung South Outline Zoning Plan No. S/NE-KTS/16, Lots 1124 RP,

1125 RP, 1126 and 1127 RP (Part) in D.D. 92, Lots 343 RP, 344A S.1

RP (Part), 402 S.A RP, 404 RP, 407 S.A RP, 407 S.A ss.1 RP, 408 S.A

RP, 408 S.C ss.2 RP, 408 S.D ss.1, 408 S.D RP and 408 RP in D.D. 94

and Adjoining Government Land, Hang Tau Tai Po, Kwu Tung South

(RNTPC Paper No. Y/NE-KTS/13)

7. The Secretary reported that the application site was located in Kwu Tung South.

LWK & Partners Architects Limited (LWK) and BMT Hong Kong Limited (BMT) were two

of the consultants of the applicant. The following Members had declared interests on the

item:

Mr K.K. Cheung - his firm having current business dealings with

LWK and BMT; and

Dr Lawrence K.C. Li - being a member of the Hong Kong Golf Club,

which was located to the north of the site.

- 6 -


of the application. As Mr K.K. Cheung had no involvement in the application and the

interest of Dr Lawrence K.C. Li was indirect, the Committee agreed that they could stay in

the meeting.

9. The Committee noted that the applicant’s representative requested on

19.7.2020 deferment of consideration of the application for two months in order to allow time

for preparation of further information to address departmental comments. It was the first

time that the applicant requested deferment of the application.










circumstances.

- 7 -

Tuen Mun and Yuen Long West District

Agenda Item 4


[Open Meeting]

Y/YL-PN/9 Application for Amendment to the Approved Sheung Pak Nai & Ha

Pak Nai Outline Zoning Plan No. S/YL-PN/9, To rezone the

application site from “Coastal Protection Area” and an area shown as

‘Road’ to “Government, Institution or Community”, Lot 118 in

D.D.135 and Adjoining Government Land, Nim Wan Road, Pak Nai,

Yuen Long

(RNTPC Paper No. Y/YL-PN/9B)

11. The Secretary reported that the application was to rezone a site from “Coastal

Protection Area” and an area shown as ‘Road’ to “Government, Institution or Community” to

facilitate a columbarium use. Mr K.K. Cheung had declared an interest on the item for his

firm being the legal advisor of the Private Columbaria Licensing Board.


of the application. As the interest of Mr K.K. Cheung was indirect, the Committee agreed

that he could stay in the meeting.



preparation of further information to address departmental comments. The RNTPC meeting

originally scheduled for 24.7.2020 had been rescheduled in light of the situation of

COVID-19 and the special work arrangement for government departments. On 25.8.2020,

the applicant’s representative confirmed that the deferral request was still valid. It was the

third time that the applicant requested deferment of the application. Since the last deferment,

the applicant had submitted further information to provide responses to departmental

comments.

- 8 -









information. Since it was the third deferment and a total of six months had been allowed for

preparation of submission of further information, this was the last deferment and no further

deferment would be granted.

Sai Kung and Islands District

Agenda Item 5

Section 16 Application

[Open Meeting]

A/SK-HC/318 Proposed Houses in “Residential (Group E)” Zone and an area shown

as ‘Road’, Lot 503 (Part) in D.D. 210, Ho Chung, Sai Kung

(RNTPC Paper No. A/SK-HC/318)



for preparation of further information to address departmental comments. The RNTPC

meeting originally scheduled for 24.7.2020 had been rescheduled in light of the situation of

COVID-19 and the special work arrangement for government departments. It was the first





- 9 -

consideration within two months from the date of receipt of further information from the






circumstances.

Sha Tin, Tai Po and North District

[Ms Hannah H.N. Yick, Ms Kathy C.L. Chan, Mr Tim T.Y. Fung and Mr Tony Y.C. Wu,

Senior Town Planners/Sha Tin, Tai Po and North (STPs/STN), were invited to the meeting at

this point.]

Agenda Item 6


[Open Meeting]

A/MOS/125 Proposed School with Recreational Area in “Other Specified Uses”

annotated “Educational and Recreational Development” Zone, Various

lots in D.D.167 and Adjoining Government Land, Nai Chung, Ma On

Shan

(RNTPC Paper No. A/MOS/125B)

17. The Secretary reported that the application was submitted by Prelong Limited,

which was a subsidiary of Sun Hung Kai Properties Limited (SHKP). Llewelyn-Davies

Hong Kong Limited (LD), AECOM Asia Company Limited (AECOM) and Archiplus

International (HK) Limited (Archiplus) were three of the consultants of the applicant. The

following Members had declared interests on the item:

- 10 -

Miss Winnie W.M. Ng - being a Director of the Kowloon Motor Bus

Company (1933) Limited (KMB) and SHKP was

one of the shareholders of KMB;

Mr Conrad T.C. Wong

- having current business dealings with SHKP;


SHKP and Archiplus;

Dr C.H. Hau - having past business dealings with AECOM; and

Mr Ricky W.Y. Yu - having past business dealings with LD.


of the application, and Miss Winnie W.M. Ng had not yet arrived to join the meeting and Mr

Ricky W.Y. Yu had tendered an apology for being unable to attend the meeting. As the

interest of Mr Conrad T.C. Wong was direct, the Committee agreed that he could stay in the

meeting but should refrain from participating in the discussion. As Dr C.H. Hau and Mr

K.K. Cheung had no involvement in the application, the Committee agreed that they could

stay in the meeting.



preparation of further information to address departmental comments. It was the third time

that the applicant requested deferment of the application. Since the last deferment, the

applicant had submitted further information including various revised technical assessments.








- 11 -


information. Since it was the third deferment and a total of six months had been allowed for

preparation of submission of further information, no further deferment would be granted

unless under very special circumstances.

Agenda Item 7


[Open Meeting (Presentation and Question Sessions Only)]

A/ST/979 Proposed Eating Place in “Village Type Development” Zone, 248 Pai

Tau Village, Sha Tin

(RNTPC Paper No. A/ST/979A)

Presentation and Question Sessions

21. Ms Hannah H.N. Yick, STP/STN, presented the application and covered the

following aspects as detailed in the Paper:

(a) background to the application;

(b) proposed eating place;

(c) departmental comments – departmental comments were set out in paragraph

9 of the Paper;

(d) during the first three weeks of the statutory publication periods, 46

comments were received from members of the Sha Tin District Council,

indigenous inhabitant representatives and villagers of Pai Tau Village, and

Designing Hong Kong Limited objecting to the application. Major

objection grounds were set out in paragraph 10 of the Paper; and

(e) the Planning Department (PlanD)’s views – PlanD had no objection to the

application based on the assessments set out in paragraph 11 of the Paper.

- 12 -

The proposed eating place to provide commercial uses serving the needs of

the villagers was generally in line with the planning intention of the

“Village Type Development” (“V”) zone and was considered not

incompatible with the land uses in the vicinity. The proposed eating place

was not anticipated to cause significant adverse impacts on pedestrian flow,

environmental, drainage, sewerage and fire safety aspects. The

Commissioner for Transport (C for T) advised that additional vehicular

access or parking provision would not be allowed and the existing public

footpath should not be affected. The Director of Environmental Protection

advised that the applicant should follow and observe the relevant

environmental guidelines. The Director of Food and Environmental

Hygiene advised that a suitable food business licence should be obtained

and no nuisance should be caused to the surrounding environment. Other

concerned government departments had no objection to or no adverse

comment on the application. Regarding the public comments, the

comments of government departments and planning assessments above

were relevant.

22. A Member enquired on how the concerns raised by C for T could be addressed.

In response, Ms Hannah H.N. Yick, STP/STN, said that the applicant had not proposed any

additional vehicular access or parking space in the submitted proposal. Regarding

pedestrian traffic, as there were an existing footpath and an open space adjoining the site, no

adverse impact was envisaged.

23. In response to the same Member’s concern on the alternative use of the

application site as village office as suggested in the public comments, Ms Hannah H.N. Yick,

STP/STN, said that Member should consider whether the applied use of eating place as

submitted by the applicant was acceptable at the application site from the planning

perspective. The District Officer/Sha Tin, Home Affairs Department had no objection to the

proposed use in the application. Should the site be used as a village office, no planning

permission from the Board was required as village office was a Column 1 use which was

always permitted within the “V” zone.

Deliberation Session

- 13 -

24. After deliberation, the Committee decided to approve the application, on the

terms of the application as submitted to the Town Planning Board (TPB). The permission

should be valid until 1.9.2024, and after the said date, the permission should cease to have

effect unless before the said date, the development permitted was commenced or the

permission was renewed. The permission was subject to the following conditions:

“ (a) the provision of fire services installations before the operation of the

proposed development to the satisfaction of the Director of Fire Services or

of the TPB; and

(b) the implementation of the sewerage connections works identified in the

sewerage impact assessment before the operation of the proposed

development to the satisfaction of the Director of Drainage Services or of

the TPB.”

25. The Committee also agreed to advise the applicant to note the advisory clauses as

set out at Appendix III of the Paper.

Agenda Items 8 and 9

Section 16 Applications


A/NE-LT/685 Proposed House (New Territories Exempted House - Small House) in

“Agriculture” Zone, Lot 913 S.B ss.1 in D.D. 8, Ma Po Mei Village,

Lam Tsuen, Tai Po

(RNTPC Paper No. A/NE-LT/685 and 686)

A/NE-LT/686 Proposed House (New Territories Exempted House - Small House) in

“Agriculture” Zone, Lot 913 S.B RP in D.D. 8, Ma Po Mei Village,

Lam Tsuen, Tai Po

(RNTPC Paper No. A/NE-LT/685 and 686)

26. The Committee noted that the two applications for proposed house (New

- 14 -

Territories Exempted House (NTEH) - Small House) would be considered together as they

were similar in nature, and the application sites were located close to each other and within

the same “Agriculture” (“AGR”) zone.


27. Ms Kathy C.L. Chan, STP/STN, presented the applications and covered the


(a) background to the applications;

(b) proposed house (NTEH - Small House) at each of the sites;


9 and Appendix V of the Paper. Local views conveyed by the District

Officer/Tai Po, Home Affairs Department were set out in paragraph 9.1 of

the Paper;

(d) during the first three weeks of the statutory publication period, four

opposing comments on both applications were received from Designing

Hong Kong Limited, Hong Kong Bird Watching Society and individuals.

Major objection grounds were set out in paragraph 10 of the Paper; and

(e) the Planning Department (PlanD)’s views – PlanD did not support the

applications based on the assessments set out in paragraph 11 of the Paper.

The proposed developments were not in line with the planning intention of

the “AGR” zone. The Director of Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation

did not support the applications as there were active agricultural activities in

the vicinity, and the sites possessed potential for agricultural rehabilitation.

The sites fell within the upper indirect water gathering grounds (WGG).

While the applicants proposed to connect the proposed Small Houses to the

existing public sewerage system at Ma Po Mei, the Chief

Engineer/Mainland North, Drainage Services Department did not support

the applications as the applicants failed to demonstrate that the proposed

- 15 -

Small Houses were able to be connected to public sewerage system in the

area. Regarding the Interim Criteria for Consideration of Application for

NTEH/Small House in New Territories (the Interim Criteria), although

more than 50% of the footprint of the proposed Small Houses fell within

the ‘village environ’ of Ma Po Mei, the proposed Small Houses did not

comply with the Interim Criteria as the applicants failed to address the

sewerage issues as stated above. Besides, while land available within the

“Village Type Development” (“V”) zone was insufficient to fully meet the

Small House demand of 190 Small Houses, it was capable to meet the 40

outstanding Small House applications. Given the adoption of a more

cautious approach in considering applications for Small House development

in recent years, it was considered more appropriate to concentrate the

proposed Small House developments within the “V” zone for more orderly

development pattern, efficient use of land and provision of infrastructure

and services. The proposed development under the current applications

were generally the same as those proposed in the last previous application

(No. A/NE-LT/647) submitted by the same applicants which was rejected

by the Town Planning Board (the Board) on review in 2019. The planning

circumstances of the current applications were not similar to the three

similar applications approved in 2016 on sympathetic consideration.

Regarding the public comments, the comments of relevant government

departments and planning assessments above were relevant.

28. In response to two Members’ questions, Ms Kathy C.L. Chan, STP/STN, said

that the applications were recommended for rejection mainly on the grounds that (i) the

applicants’ failure to demonstrate that the proposed development located within the WGG

would be able to be connected to the existing or planned public sewerage system causing no

adverse impact on the water quality in the area; and (ii) land was still available within the

“V” zone to meet the 40 outstanding Small House applications. With the more cautious

approach adopted by the Board in recent years in the consideration of Small House

applications, the two applications were recommended for rejection. Hence, even if the

technical issue related to sewerage connection could be resolved by the applicants, the

applications would still unlikely warrant favourable consideration by the Committee.

- 16 -


29. A Member expressed that while some applications were rejected due to several

grounds including those relating to technical aspect, it was not uncommon that the applicants

of those rejected applications would make new applications after resolving the technical

issues with a view to obtaining approvals from the Committee, without realising that the

application would still be rejected based on other non-technical reasons. To avoid the

applicants’ abortive efforts to tackle the technical aspect, the Member enquired whether the

sequence of the rejection reasons should be reviewed in accordance with the order of

significance.

30. The Chairman explained that the sequence of the recommended rejection reasons

as listed in the Paper did not signify the weighting of each reason, and the established

practice was to first list out the one relating to the planning intention, followed by the

relevant Town Planning Board Guidelines or assessment criteria, and then other technical or

case specific grounds. Noting the Member’s concern, the Chairman invited Members to

express views in that respect.

31. A Member remarked that the application might be approved in the future when

the technical issues on sewerage connection were properly addressed and land available

within the “V” zone would no longer be able to meet the outstanding Small House

applications. The Chairman recapitulated for Members’ reference that a more cautious

approach in considering applications for Small House development had been adopted by the

Board in recent years with a view to concentrating the proposed Small House developments

within the “V” zone for more orderly development pattern, efficient use of land and provision

of infrastructure and services.

32. Some Members expressed the following views:

(a) while the sequence of rejection reasons might be perceived to have some

indication of weighting, failure to address any of them would still constitute

a rejection of the application. It might not be appropriate to determine the

sequence according to their ‘importance’;

- 17 -

(b) instead of re-arranging the sequence of the rejection reasons, consideration

could be given to categorising them into policy related and technical/case

specific reasons for easy understanding; and

(c) should the Committee consider it necessary to rearrange the sequence of

rejection reasons as a general practice, it would be more appropriate to

discuss the matter in the full Board.

33. A Member considered it not necessary to rearrange the rejection reasons in the

sequence of their importance as they reflected a holistic and comprehensive consideration of

the Committee/Board. Their sequence should not be interpreted as the Committee/Board’s

views on their weighting or relative importance.

34. Another Member remarked that there should be careful and thorough

consideration when making a decision on the above as the rearrangement of sequence of

rejection reasons for the subject applications might lead to a wrong perception that the

rejection reasons relating to planning principle/compliance of guidelines could be overridden

by technical issues. The Vice-chairman and two other Members concurred, and considered

that the current practice as explained by the Chairman was appropriate and could sufficiently

serve the purpose of presenting the rejection reasons covering different areas of consideration.

Hence, further categorisation or prioritisation of rejection reasons might not be necessary.

35. The Chairman concluded that the Committee in general considered it not

necessary to change the sequence of rejection reasons for the subject applications and agreed

to follow the current approach in presenting the rejection reasons as a general practice. The

Committee agreed.

36. After deliberation, the Committee decided to reject the applications. The

reasons for each of the applications were:

“ (a) the proposed development is not in line with the planning intention of the

“Agriculture” zone, which is primarily to retain and safeguard good quality

agricultural land/farm/fish ponds for agricultural purposes. It is also

intended to retain fallow arable land with good potential for rehabilitation

- 18 -

for cultivation and other agricultural purposes. There is no strong

planning justification in the submission for a departure from the planning

intention;

(b) the proposed development does not comply with the Interim Criteria for

Consideration of Application for New Territories Exempted House/Small

House in New Territories in that the applicant fails to demonstrate that the

proposed development located within water gathering grounds would be

able to be connected to the existing or planned sewerage system and would

not cause adverse impact on the water quality in the area; and

(c) land is still available within the “Village Type Development” (“V”) zone of

Ma Po Mei and Tai Mong Che which is primarily intended for Small House

development. It is considered more appropriate to concentrate the

proposed Small House development within the “V” zone for more orderly

development pattern, efficient use of land and provision of infrastructures

and services.”

Agenda Item 10



A/NE-HLH/44 Temporary Open Storage of Construction Materials for a Period of 2

Years in “Agriculture” Zone, Lot 629 in D.D. 84, Hung Lung Hang

(RNTPC Paper No. A/NE-HLH/44)


37. Mr Tim T.Y. Fung, STP/STN, presented the application and covered the



- 19 -

(b) temporary open storage of construction materials for a period of two years;


10 of the Paper. Local views conveyed by the District Officer (North),

Home Affairs Department were set out in paragraph 10.1.10 of the Paper;

(d) during the first three weeks of the statutory publication period, five public

comments were received, with four objecting comments from Kadoorie

Farm and Botanic Garden, World Wide Fund-Hong Kong, Designing Hong

Kong Limited and an individual, and one from a member of the Northern

District Council indicating no comment on the application. Major




The applied use was not in line with the planning intention of the

“Agriculture” zone and the Director of Agriculture, Fisheries and

Conservation did not support the application in view of active agricultural

activities in the vicinity and the site possessed potential for agricultural

rehabilitation. The application did not comply with the Town Planning

Board Guidelines No. 13F in that the site fell within Category 3 area where

applications would normally not be favourably considered unless with

previous planning approvals. The Chief Town Planner/Urban Design and

Landscape, PlanD had reservation on the application from landscape

planning perspective. The Commissioner for Transport did not support

the application as the applicant failed to demonstrate that the development

would not generate adverse traffic impact on the surrounding area. The

Director of Environmental Protection did not support the application as

there was a domestic structure in the vicinity of the site. A previous

application for the same use at the site submitted by the same applicant was

rejected by the Committee. There had been no major change in planning

circumstances of the area since the rejection of the previous application.

Regarding the public comments, the comments of government departments

- 20 -

and planning assessments above were relevant.

38. Upon the Chairman’s enquiry, Mr Tim T.Y. Fung, STP/STN, confirmed that the

proposal of the subject application was the same as that of the previous rejected application

submitted by the same applicant.


39. After deliberation, the Committee decided to reject the application. The reasons

were:

“ (a) the development is not in line with the planning intention of the

“Agriculture” zone which is primarily to retain and safeguard good quality

agricultural land/farm/fish ponds for agricultural purposes and to retain

fallow arable land with good potential for rehabilitation for cultivation and

other agricultural purposes. There is no strong justification in the

submission for a departure from such planning intention, even on a

temporary basis;

(b) the development does not comply with the Town Planning Board

Guidelines No. 13F for ‘Application for Open Storage and Port Back-up

Uses under Section 16 of the Town Planning Ordinance’ in that there is no

previous approval for open storage granted for the site; and there are

adverse comments from the relevant government departments and local

objections against the application; and

(c) the applicant fails to demonstrate that the development would not cause

adverse traffic impact on the surrounding areas.”

- 21 -

Agenda Item 11



A/NE-LK/129 Renewal of Planning Approval for Temporary Public Utility

Installation (Telephone Exchange) for a Period of 5 Years in

“Agriculture” Zone, Government Land in D.D. 39, Shek Chung Au,

Sha Tau Kok

(RNTPC Paper No. A/NE-LK/129)

40. The Secretary reported that the application was submitted by PCCW - HKT

Telephone Limited (PCCW). Mr K.K. Cheung had declared an interest on the item for his

firm having current business dealings with PCCW. As Mr K.K. Cheung had no

involvement in the application, the Committee agreed that he could stay in the meeting.





(b) renewal of planning approval for temporary public utility installation

(telephone exchange) for a period of five years;


9 of the Paper;

(d) during the first three weeks of the statutory publication period, two public

comments were received. The Chairman of Sheung Shui District Rural

Committee indicated no comment on the application and an individual

provided views on the application. Major views and concerns were set out

in paragraph 10 of the Paper; and

- 22 -



The application was in line with the Town Planning Board Guidelines No.

34C in that there had been no major change in planning circumstances since

the last approval. Concerned government departments had no objection to

or no adverse comment on the application. Regarding the public

comments, the comments of government departments and planning

assessments above were relevant.

42. In response to the Chairman’s question, Mr Tim T.Y. Fung, STP/STN, said that

the concerned public utility installation was temporary in nature. The site was the subject of

two previously approved applications for similar temporary public utility installation for a

period of five years submitted by the same applicant under the current application. This was

the second time that a renewal of planning approval was submitted to the Town Planning

Board.


43. The Committee noted that while there was provision for application for a

permanent approval for the applied use, the applicant had decided to renew the planning

approval on a temporary basis as the service demand in the area was not high at the moment.

44. After deliberation, the Committee decided to approve the application on a

temporary basis for a period of 5 years until 1.9.2025, on the terms of the application as

submitted to the Town Planning Board (TPB) and subject to the following conditions:

“ (a) the existing drainage facilities implemented under application

No. A/NE-LK/98 on the site shall be maintained properly at all times

during the planning approval period;

(b) the existing fire services installations implemented on the site shall be

maintained in efficient working order at all times during the planning

approval period;

- 23 -

(c) the submission of a record of existing drainage facilities on the site within 3

months from the date of commencement of the renewed planning approval

to the satisfaction of the Director of Drainage Services or of the TPB by

1.12.2020;

(d) if any of the above planning conditions (a) or (b) is not complied with

during the planning approval period, the approval hereby given shall cease

to have effect and shall be revoked immediately without further notice; and

(e) if the above planning condition (c) is not complied with by the specified

date, the approval hereby given shall cease to have effect and shall on the

same date be revoked without further notice.”


set out at Appendix V of the Paper.

Agenda Item 12



A/NE-LYT/727 Proposed House (New Territories Exempted House - Small House) in

“Agriculture” Zone, Lot 1584 S.G in D.D.76, Kan Tau Tsuen, Fanling

(RNTPC Paper No. A/NE-LYT/727)





(b) proposed house (New Territories Exempted House (NTEH) - Small House);

- 24 -


9 and Appendix IV of the Paper. Local views conveyed by the District

Officer (North), Home Affairs Department were set out in paragraph 9.1 of

the Paper;

(d) during the first three weeks of the statutory publication period, three public

comments were received, with the Chairman of Sheung Shui District Rural

Committee indicating no comment on the application, Designing Hong

Kong Limited objecting to the application and an individual providing

views. Major views were set out in paragraph 10 of the Paper; and



While the proposed Small House development was not in line with the

planning intention of the “Agriculture” zone and the Director of Agriculture,

Fisheries and Conservation did not support the application from the

agricultural development point of view as the site possessed potential for

agricultural rehabilitation, the proposed Small House development was not

entirely incompatible with the surrounding environment. Regarding the

Interim Criteria for Consideration of Application for NTEH/Small House in

New Territories (the Interim Criteria), the footprint of the proposed Small

House fell entirely within the ‘village environ’ of Kan Tau Tsuen. Land

available within the “Village Type Development” zone was insufficient to

meet the Small House demand but was capable to meet the outstanding

Small House applications. Nonetheless, the site was in close proximity to

the existing village proper of Kan Tau Tsuen and there were also existing

village houses to the west of the site, and approved Small House

applications to the north, east and south at different stages of development.

The implementation of those approved Small Houses was forming a new

village cluster in the locality. In that regard, sympathetic consideration

might be given to the application. Other concerned government

departments had no objection to or no adverse comment on the application.

Among the 41 similar applications in the close proximity, the circumstances

- 25 -

of the current application were similar to those of the seven similar

applications approved between 2015 and 2019. Regarding the public

comments, the comments of government departments and planning


47. Members had no question on the application.







“ (a) the provision of septic tank, as proposed by the applicant, at a location to

the satisfaction of the Director of Lands or of the TPB; and

(b) the submission and implementation of a drainage proposal to the

satisfaction of the Director of Drainage Services or of the TPB.


set out at Appendix VI of the Paper.

Agenda Items 13 and 14

Section 16 Applications



“Agriculture” Zone, Lot 1773 S.A ss. 1 in D.D. 76, Ma Mei Ha Leng

Tsui, Fanling

(RNTPC Paper No. A/NE-LYT/728 and 729)

- 26 -


“Agriculture” Zone, Lot 1773 S.A ss. 3 in D.D. 76, Ma Mei Ha Leng

Tsui, Fanling

(RNTPC Paper No. A/NE-LYT/728 and 729)

50. The Committee noted that the two applications for proposed house (New

Territories Exempted House (NTEH) - Small House) would be considered together as they

were similar in nature, and the application sites were located close to each other and within

the same “Agriculture” (“AGR”) zone.


51. Mr Tim T.Y. Fung, STP/STN, presented the applications and covered the


(a) background to the applications;

(b) proposed House (NTEH - Small House) at each of the sites;


9 and Appendix IV of the Paper. Local views conveyed by the District

Officer (North), Home Affairs Department were set out in paragraph 9.1 of

the Paper;

(d) during the first three weeks of the statutory publication period, five public

comments on both applications were received, with four opposing

comments from the Chairman and the First Vice Chairman of Fanling

District Rural Committee, Designing Hong Kong Limited and an individual,

and one from the Sheung Shui District Rural Committee indicating no

comment on the applications. Major objection grounds were set out in

paragraph 10 of the Paper; and


- 27 -

applications based on the assessments set out in paragraph 11 of the Paper.

While the proposed Small Houses were not in line with the planning

intention of the “Agriculture” zone and the Director of Agriculture,

Fisheries and Conservation did not support the applications from the

agricultural development point of view as the site possessed potential for

agricultural rehabilitation, the proposed Small Houses were not entirely

incompatible with the surrounding environment. The Commissioner for

Transport considered that the proposed developments involving two Small

Houses could be tolerated. Regarding the Interim Criteria for

Consideration of Application for NTEH/Small House in the New

Territories (the Interim Criteria), more than 50% of the footprints of the

proposed Small Houses fell within the ‘village environ’ of Ma Mei Ha Leng

Tsui and Leng Pei Tsuen. Land available within the “Village Type

Development” (“V”) zone was insufficient to meet the outstanding Small

House applications and 10-year Small House demand forecast. The

applications were considered in compliance with the Interim Criteria.

There were 53 approved similar applications for Small House development

in close proximity to the sites. Regarding the public comments, the


were relevant.

52. Members had no question on the applications.


53. After deliberation, the TPB decided to approve the applications, on the terms of

the applications as submitted to the Town Planning Board (TPB). Each of the permissions



permission was renewed. Each of the permissions was subject to the following conditions:

“(a) the provision of septic tank, as proposed by the applicant, at a location to

the satisfaction of the Director of Lands or of the TPB; and

- 28 -

(b) the submission and implementation of a drainage proposal to the

satisfaction of the Director of Drainage Services or of the TPB.”

54. The Committee also agreed to advise the applicants to note the advisory clauses

as set out at Appendix VI of the Paper.

Agenda Item 15



A/NE-TKL/641 Temporary Open Storage of Construction Materials and Machinery for

a Period of 3 Years in “Agriculture” Zone, Lots 50 and 51 in D.D. 77,

Ta Kwu Ling

(RNTPC Paper No. A/NE-TKL/641)

55. The Secretary reported that the application site was located in Ta Kwu Ling and

Mr Conrad T.C. Wong had declared an interest on the item for being the director of Yau Lee

Construction Company Limited which owned a piece of land in Ta Kwu Ling. As the

property owned by Mr Conrad T.C. Wong’s company had no direct view of the site, the

Committee agreed that he could stay in the meeting.





(b) temporary open storage of construction materials and machinery for a

period of three years;


10 of the Paper. Local views conveyed by the District Officer (North),

- 29 -

Home Affairs Department were set out in paragraph 10.1.10 of the Paper;

(d) during the first three weeks of the statutory publication period, four public

comments were received, with three objecting comments from Kadoorie

Farm and Botanic Garden Corporation, World Wide Fund for Nature Hong

Kong and an individual, and one from the Chairman of Sheung Shui

District Rural Committee indicating no comment on the application.




The applied use was not in line with the planning intention of the

“Agriculture” (“AGR”) zone and the Director of Agriculture, Fisheries and

Conservation did not support the application as there were active

agricultural activities in the vicinity and the site possessed potential for

agricultural rehabilitation. The application did not comply with the Town

Planning Board Guidelines No. 13F in that the site fell within Category 3

area where applications would normally not be favourably considered

unless with previous planning approvals. The site was not the subject of a

previous planning approval for open storage use. The Chief Town

Planner/Urban Design and Landscape, PlanD had reservation on the

application as the development was not entirely compatible with the

surrounding landscape character within the “AGR” zone. The

Commissioner for Transport did not support the application as there was

insufficient information to demonstrate that the applied use would not

generate significant adverse traffic impact on the surrounding area. The

Director of Environmental Protection did not support the application as

there were some temporary domestic structures in the vicinity of the site.

There were two similar applications for temporary open storage rejected by

the Committee. The circumstances of the current application were similar

to those of the two rejected applications. Regarding the public comments,

the comments of government departments and planning assessments above

were relevant.

- 30 -




were:

“ (a) the development is not in line with the planning intention of the

“Agriculture” zone, which is intended primarily to retain and safeguard

good quality agricultural land/farm/fish ponds for agricultural purposes and

to retain fallow arable land with good potential for rehabilitation for

cultivation and other agricultural purposes. There is no strong

justification in the submission for a departure from such planning intention,

even on a temporary basis;

(b) the application does not comply with the Town Planning Board Guidelines

No. 13F for Application for Open Storage and Port Back-up Uses under

Section 16 of the Town Planning Ordinance in that there is no previous

planning approval for open storage use granted at the site; there are adverse

comments from the relevant government departments and local objections

against the application; and

(c) the applicants fail to demonstrate that the development would have no

adverse traffic impact on the surrounding areas.”

- 31 -

Agenda Item 16



A/NE-KLH/584 Temporary Warehouse with Ancillary Office for a Period of 3 Years in

“Green Belt” Zone, Lots 617 S.B RP, 618 S.B ss.1 and 622 S.B RP

(Part) in D.D. 9, Nam Wa Po, Kau Lung Hang, Tai Po

(RNTPC Paper No. A/NE-KLH/584A)


59. Mr Tony Y.C. Wu, STP/STN, presented the application and covered the



(b) temporary warehouse with ancillary office for a period of three years;


10 of the Paper;


comments were received, with two objecting comments from Nam Wa Po

Village Committee and Designing Hong Kong Limited, and one from an

individual providing views. Major objection grounds and views were set

out in paragraph 11 of the Paper; and

(e) the Planning Department (PlanD)’s views – PlanD considered that the

applied use could be tolerated for a period of three years based on the

assessments set out in paragraph 12 of the Paper. While the applied use

was not in line with the planning intention of the “Green Belt” (“GB”) zone,

it was considered not incompatible with the surrounding uses. The Chief

Town Planner/Urban Design & Landscape, PlanD had no objection to the

application as direct conflict between the applied use and the existing

- 32 -

landscape resources was not anticipated. While the Director of

Environmental Protection did not support the application, appropriate

approval conditions were recommended to address the concerns on the

possible environmental nuisance generated by the applied use. There were

five approved similar applications for warehouse uses within the same

“GB” zone. The consideration of the applied use under the current

application was similar to that of the previously approved applications.



60. In response to a Member’s enquiry, Mr Tony Y.C. Wu, STP/STN, said that the

site was zoned as “GB” since the first gazette of the outline zoning plan in 1994 as it was part

of a vegetated area to the north. The on-going temporary land uses and public works in the

area had led to a gradual degradation of the environment and hence the coverage of

vegetation had been reduced. Opportunity would be taken to review the zoning of the area

to reflect the existing condition where appropriate.

61. In response to the enquiries of the Chairman and a Member, Mr Tony Y.C. Wu,

STP/STN, made the following main points:

(a) the site and the adjoining open storage site to the south were under the

ownership of the applicant and shared a common access from Tai Wo

Service Road West and common areas for loading/unloading activities;

(b) heavy goods vehicles would not be allowed to enter or park on the site and

the loading/unloading activities would be carried out on the adjoining open

storage site to the south to minimize possible environmental nuisance to the

residents in a nearby village house; and

(c) the site was covered by previous planning approvals since 2011 and had

been hard paved for parking of vehicles for a long period of time.


- 33 -




“ (a) no operation between 6:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m. from Mondays to Saturdays,

as proposed by the applicant, is allowed on the site during the planning

approval period;

(b) no operation on Sundays and public holidays, as proposed by the applicant,

is allowed on the site during the planning approval period;

(c) the existing stormwater drainage facilities on the site should be maintained

at all times during the planning approval period;

(d) no excavation works should be carried out unless prior written approval

from the Director of Water Supplies is obtained, and no sinking of wells,

blasting, drilling or piling works are allowed on the site at any time during

the planning approval period;

(e) no dismantling, maintenance, repairing, cleansing, paint spraying or other

workshop activities are allowed on the site at any time during the planning

approval period;

(f) no medium or heavy goods vehicles exceeding 5.5 tonnes, including

container tractors/trailers, as defined in the Road Traffic Ordinance, are

allowed to be parked/stored on or enter/exit the site at any time during the

planning approval period;

(g) the submission of a sewerage connection proposal within 6 months from the

date of planning approval to the satisfaction of the Director of Drainage

Services or of the TPB by 1.3.2021;

(h) in relation to (g) above, the implementation of sewerage connection

proposal within 9 months from the date of planning approval to the

- 34 -

satisfaction of the Director of Drainage Services or of the TPB by 1.6.2021;

(i) the submission of a proposal for fire services installations and water

supplies for fire-fighting within 6 months from the date of planning

approval to the satisfaction of the Director of Fire Services or of the TPB by

1.3.2021;

(j) in relation to (i) above, the implementation of the proposal for fire services

installations and water supplies for fire-fighting within 9 months from the

date of planning approval to the satisfaction of the Director of Fire Services

or of the TPB by 1.6.2021;

(k) the implementation of protective measures against pollution or

contamination to the water gathering grounds, as proposed by the applicant,

within 6 months from the date of planning approval to the satisfaction of

the Director of Water Supplies or of the TPB by 1.3.2021;

(l) if any of the above planning conditions (a), (b), (c), (d), (e) or (f) is not

complied with during the planning approval period, the approval hereby

given shall cease to have effect and shall be revoked immediately without

further notice;

(m) if any of the above planning conditions (g), (h), (i), (j) or (k) is not

complied with by the specified date, the approval hereby given shall cease

to have effect and shall on the same date be revoked without further notice;

and

(n) upon expiry of the planning permission, the reinstatement of the site to an

amenity area to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning or of the TPB.”


set out at Appendix VII of the Paper.

[Dr Lawrence K.C. Li left the meeting at this point.]

- 35 -

Agenda Item 17



A/NE-KLH/587 Proposed 9 Houses (New Territories Exempted Houses) in

“Agriculture” Zone, Lot 95 in D.D. 16, Lam Tsuen, Tai Po

(RNTPC Paper No. A/NE-KLH/587)





(b) proposed nine houses (New Territories Exempted Houses (NTEHs);


9 of the Paper;


comments were received from Designing Hong Kong Limited and an

individual opposing the application. Major objection grounds were set out




The proposed development was not in line with the planning intention of

the “Agriculture” (“AGR”) zone. The Director of Agriculture, Fisheries

and Conservation did not support the application from agricultural point of

view as the site possessed potential for agricultural rehabilitation. The

Chief Town Planner/Urban Design & Landscape, PlanD had reservation on

the application as the proposed development was considered not entirely

- 36 -

compatible with the landscape character within and surrounding the site and

adverse impact on existing landscape resources was anticipated. The

Director of Environmental Protection and the Chief Engineer/Construction,

Water Supplies Department objected to the application as there was

insufficient information to demonstrate that the small sewerage treatment

plants proposed by the applicants had a capacity to treat the sewage to meet

the required standards. The Head of Geotechnical Engineering Office,

Civil Engineering and Development Department did not support the

application as the applicants had not submitted a Geotechnical Planning

Review Report. Other concerned government departments had no

objection to or no adverse comment on the application. The proposed

development did not comply with the Interim Criteria for Consideration of

Application for NTEH/Small House in the New Territories. While there

were two approved similar applications in the “AGR” zone, the grounds of

approval were not applicable to the current application. Regarding the

public comments, the comments of government departments and planning


65. In response to a Member’s question, Mr Tony Y.C. Wu, STP/STN, clarified that

the application was not for the development of Small Houses by indigenous villagers under

the New Territories Small House Policy. The proposed houses were considered as NTEHs

as they met the building height and roofed-over area criteria for exemption from the

requirement of building plan submission under the Buildings Ordinance.

66. A Member enquired if there were any examples of approved applications for

NTEH (not Small Houses) and whether they were for replacing the existing domestic

building on site or being the subject of a previous approval. In response, Mr Tony Y.C. Wu,

STP/STN, said that there were two such approved applications in Kau Lung Hang (No.

A/NE-KLH/381 and 545). They involved the same site located to the southeast of the

application site, and both applications were not for replacing the existing domestic building.

These applications were supported with mitigation measures to address the landscape and

traffic impacts and a proposal for connecting with future public sewers. Furthermore, the

subject lots had building entitlement. The planning circumstances of these approved

applications were not applicable to the current case.

- 37 -



were:

“ (a) the proposed development is not in line with the planning intention of the

“Agriculture” zone which is primarily to retain and safeguard good quality

agricultural land/farm/fish ponds for agricultural purposes. It is also

intended to retain fallow arable land with good potential for rehabilitation

for cultivation and other agricultural purposes. There is no strong

planning justification in the submission for a departure from the planning

intention; and

(b) the proposed development does not comply with the Interim Criteria for

Consideration of Application for New Territories Exempted House/Small

House in New Territories in that the site located within water gathering

grounds would not be able to be connected to the existing or planned public

sewerage system in the area. The applicants also fail to demonstrate that

the proposed development would not cause adverse landscape, geotechnical

and water quality impacts on the area.”

Agenda Item 18


[Open Meeting]

A/NE-PK/139 Temporary Private Car Park (Private Car and Light Goods Vehicle) for

a Period of 3 Years in “Village Type Development” Zone, Lot 2366 RP

(Part) in D.D. 91, Ping Kong, Sheung Shui

(RNTPC Paper No. A/NE-PK/139)

68. The Committee noted that the applicants’ representative requested on


- 38 -

for preparation of further information to address the comments from the Transport

Department. It was the first time that the applicants requested deferment of the application.


as requested by the applicants pending the submission of further information from the

applicants. The Committee agreed that the application should be submitted for its


applicants. If the further information submitted by the applicants was not substantial and



applicants that two months were allowed for preparation of the submission of the further


circumstances.

Agenda Item 19



A/NE-SSH/136 Renewal of Planning Approval for Temporary Eating Place (Outside

Seating Accommodation of a Restaurant) for a Period of 3 Years in

“Village Type Development” Zone, Lots 1046, 1047 and 1051 (Part) in

D.D.165 and Adjoining Government Land, Tseng Tau Village, Shap

Sze Heung

(RNTPC Paper No. A/NE-SSH/136)





(b) renewal of planning approval for temporary eating place (outside seating

- 39 -

accommodation of a restaurant) for a period of three years;


9 of the Paper;

(d) during the first three weeks of the statutory publication period, no public

comment was received; and




34C (TPB PG-No. 34C) in that there had been no major change in planning

circumstances since the last approval. The application was also generally

in line with the TPB PG-No. 15A for application for eating place within the

“Village Type Development” zone. Concerned government departments

had no objection to or no adverse comment on the application.






“ (a) no operation between 9:30 p.m. and 7:00 a.m., as proposed by the applicant,


(b) the existing drainage facilities on the site shall be maintained in efficient

working order at all times during the planning approval period;

(c) the existing fire service installations implemented on the site shall be


approval period; and

- 40 -

(d) if any of the above planning conditions (a), (b) or (c) is not complied with

at any time during the planning approval period, the approval hereby given

shall cease to have effect and shall be revoked immediately without further

notice.”



Agenda Item 20


[Open Meeting]

A/NE-TK/678 Proposed Temporary Place of Recreation, Sports or Culture (Hobby

Farm) with Ancillary Facilities and Eating Place for a Period of 5

Years and Filling of Land in “Agriculture” Zone and area shown as

‘Road’, Lots 605 (Part), 606 (Part), 607, 608 (Part), 610 (Part), 611,

612, 613 (Part), 614 (Part), 622 (Part), 623, 624 S.A (Part), 625 S.A

(Part), 626, 627 S.A & S.B, 628 S.A, 628 RP, 629, 630, 631 S.A, 631

RP, 632 S.A, 632 S.B RP, 633, 634, 635, 636, 637, 638, 639, 640, 641,

642, 643, 644 S.A, 644 S.B (Part), 645 (Part), 646 (Part), 656 (Part),

657, 658 (Part), 662, 663, 664, 665, 666, 667 RP, 668 RP, 669, 690 RP,

1274 RP, 1275, 1276, 1277 RP, 1278, 1343 S.B ss. 1 (Part), 1346 S.A

RP, 1346 S.B ss. 1 (Part) and 1347 S.A (Part) in D.D. 17, and

Adjoining Government Land, Ting Kok Road, Tai Po

(RNTPC Paper No. A/NE-TK/678A)


deferment of consideration of the application for a period of two months in order to allow

time for preparation of further information to address departmental comments. It was the

second time that the applicant requested deferment of the application. Since the last

deferment, the applicant had submitted further information including responses to

departmental comments.

- 41 -









information. Since it was the second deferment and a total of four months had been allowed

for preparation of submission of further information, no further deferment would be granted

unless under very special circumstances.

Agenda Item 21



A/NE-TK/684 Temporary Public Vehicle Park (Private Cars only) for a Period of 3

Years in “Village Type Development” and “Recreation” Zones, Lots

1604 S.B and 1604 S.C RP (Part) in D.D. 17, Lo Tsz Tin Village, Tai

Po

(RNTPC Paper No. A/NE-TK/684)





(b) temporary public vehicle park (private cars only) for a period of three years;

- 42 -


9 of the Paper;

(d) during the first three weeks of the statutory publication period, one

objecting public comment was received from an individual. Major




While the applied use was not entirely in line with the planning intentions

of the “Recreation” and “Village Type Development” (“V”) zones, it was to

serve the visitors to the recreational facilities in the vicinity as well as the

villagers nearby. As there was no application for Small House on the site

received by the District Lands Officer/Tai Po, Lands Department, approval

of the application on a temporary basis for a period of three years would not

frustrate the long-term planning intention of “V” zone. Concerned

government departments had no objection to or no adverse comments on

the application. There was one similar application rejected by the

Committee mainly on the ground of adverse geotechnical impact on the

concerned site and its surrounding areas. The reason for rejecting the

similar application was not applicable to the current application.

Regarding the public comment, the comments of government departments







“ (a) no vehicle without valid licence issued under the Road Traffic

(Registration and Licensing of Vehicles) Regulations is allowed to be

- 43 -

parked/stored on or enter/exit the site at any time during the planning

approval period;

(b) only private cars as defined in the Road Traffic Ordinance are allowed to be


approval period;

(c) a notice should be posted at a prominent location of the site to indicate that

only private cars as defined in the Road Traffic Ordinance are allowed to be


approval period;

(d) the provision of peripheral fencing on the site within 6 months from the

date of planning approval to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning or

of the TPB by 1.3.2021;

(e) the submission of a drainage proposal within 6 months from the date of

planning approval to the satisfaction of the Director of Drainage Services or


(f) in relation to (e) above, the implementation of the drainage proposal within

9 months from the date of planning approval to the satisfaction of the

Director of Drainage Services or of the TPB by 1.6.2021;

(g) the submission of proposals for fire services installations (FSIs) and water



1.3.2021;

(h) in relation to (g) above, the implementation of proposals for FSIs and water



1.6.2021;

- 44 -

(i) if any of the above planning conditions (a), (b) or (c) is not complied with



(j) if any of the above planning conditions (d), (e), (f), (g) or (h) is not


to have effect and shall on the same date be revoked without further

notice.”



Agenda Item 22



A/NE-TK/685 Proposed House (New Territories Exempted House - Small House) in

“Green Belt” and “Village Type Development” Zones, Lots 1397 RP

and 1398 RP in D.D. 17, Lo Tsz Tin Village, Tai Po






(b) proposed house (New Territories Exempted House (NTEH) - Small House)


10 and Appendix IV of the Paper;

- 45 -

(d) during the first three weeks of the statutory publication period, three

objecting public comments were received, with two from the adjacent lot

owners and one from an individual. Major objection grounds were set out




The site was partly zoned “Village Type Development” (“V”) and partly

“Green Belt” (“GB”). The proposed development was not in line with the

planning intention of the “GB” zone as there was a general presumption

against development though the proposed development was not

incompatible with the surrounding landscape character. Regarding the

Interim Criteria for Consideration of Application for NTEH/Small House in

the New Territories (the Interim Criteria), while the proposed Small House

footprint fell entirely outside the ‘village environ’ of Lo Tsz Tin, more than

50% of the Small House footprint fell within the “V” zone of the same

village. Although land available within the “V” zone was insufficient to

fully meet the future Small House demand, it was capable to meet the

outstanding Small House applications. It was considered more appropriate

to concentrate the proposed Small House developments within the “V” zone

for more orderly development pattern, efficient use of land and provision of

infrastructure and services. After the adoption of the more cautious

approach in considering applications for Small House development, two

applications were approved, but the circumstances of the current application

were different from those of the approved applications. Regarding the

public comments, the comments of government departments and planning





were:

- 46 -

“(a) the proposed development is not in line with the planning intention of the

“Green Belt” zone, which is primarily for defining the limits of urban and

suburban development areas by natural features and to contain urban

sprawl as well as to provide passive recreational outlets. There is a

general presumption against development within this zone. There is no

strong planning justification in the submission for a departure from the

planning intention; and

(b) land is still available within the “Village Type Development” (“V”) zone of

Lo Tsz Tin which is primarily intended for Small House development. It

is considered more appropriate to concentrate the proposed Small House

development within the “V” zone for more orderly development pattern,

efficient use of land and provision of infrastructure and services.”

Agenda Item 23


[Open Meeting]

A/NE-TK/686 Proposed 7 Houses (New Territories Exempted Houses) in

“Agriculture” Zone, Lots 253 S.A ss.1, 253 S.A ss.2, 253 S.A ss.3, 253

S.A ss.4, 253 S.A ss.5, 253 S.A ss.6 and 253 S.A RP in D.D. 23, Ting

Kok, Tai Po









- 47 -







circumstances.

[The Chairman thanked Ms Hannah H.N. Yick, Ms Kathy C.L. Chan, Mr Tim T.Y. Fung and

Mr Tony Y.C. Wu, STPs/STN, for their attendance to answer Members’ enquiries. They

left the meeting at this point.]

Fanling, Sheung Shui and Yuen Long East District

[Ms Ivy C.W. Wong, Senior Town Planner/Fanling, Sheung Shui and Yuen Long East

(STP/FSYLE), was invited to the meeting at this point.]

Agenda Item 24


[Open Meeting]

A/YL-KTN/714 Proposed Public Utility Installation (Solar Energy and Wind Power

Generation System) in “Agriculture” Zone, Lot 157 RP (Part) in

D.D.110, Tsat Sing Kong, Kam Tin North, Yuen Long

(RNTPC Paper No. A/YL-KTN/714)

85. The Committee noted that the applicant requested on 13.7.2020 deferment of

consideration of the application for two months in order to allow time for preparation of

further information in response to departmental comments. It was the first time that the

applicant requested deferment of the application.


- 48 -









circumstances.

Agenda Item 25


[Open Meeting]

A/YL-KTN/715 Proposed Temporary Site Office and Plant Nursery with Ancillary

Open Storage of Building Materials, Tools and Equipment,

Landscaping Equipment and Hardware and Ancillary Staff Car Park for

a Period of 3 Years in “Comprehensive Development Area (1)” Zone,

Lots 1555 S.A (Part), 1555 S.B RP (Part), 1557 RP (Part), 1558 (Part)

and 1559 (Part) in D.D. 107, Cheung Chun San Tsuen, Kam Tin, Yuen

Long


87. The Secretary reported that the application was submitted by Bright Strong

Limited, which was a subsidiary of Sun Hung Kai Properties Limited (SHKP). The

following Members had declared interest on the item:

Miss Winnie W.M. Ng - being a Director of the Kowloon Motor Bus

Company (1933) Limited (KMB) and SHKP was

one of the shareholders of KMB;

Mr Conrad T.C. Wong - having current business dealings with SHKP;

and

- 49 -


SHKP.


of the application and Miss Winnie W.N. Ng had not yet arrived to join the meeting. As the

interest of Mr Conrad T.C. Wong was direct, the Committee agreed that he could stay in the

meeting but should refrain from participating in the discussion. As Mr. K.K. Cheung had no

involvement in the application, the Committee agreed that he could stay in the meeting.



for preparation of further information in response to departmental comments. It was the

first time that the applicant requested deferment of the application.










circumstances.

- 50 -

Agenda Item 26


[Open Meeting]

A/YL-KTN/716 Proposed Temporary Animal Boarding Establishment for a Period of 3

Years and Filling of Land in “Agriculture” Zone, Lot 1093 in D.D.

107, Kam Tin North, Yuen Long















circumstances.

- 51 -

Agenda Item 27


[Open Meeting]

A/YL-KTN/717 Proposed Temporary Eating Place and Public Car Park (excluding

Container Vehicle) for a Period of 3 Years in “Village Type

Development” Zone, Lots 594 RP and 595 RP in D.D. 109, Chi Ho

Road, Kam Tin, Yuen Long















circumstances.

Agenda Item 28


[Open Meeting]

A/YL-KTS/850 Proposed House in “Residential (Group D)” Zone, Lot 1285 RP in

D.D. 106, Kam Tin, Yuen Long

(RNTPC Paper No. A/YL-KTS/850)

- 52 -














circumstances.

Agenda Item 29



A/YL-PH/846 Proposed Temporary Wholesale Trade (Food) for a Period of 5 Years

in “Open Storage” Zone, Lots 854 (Part), 856 (Part), 857, 858 and 874

in D.D. 111 and Adjoining Government Land, Ha Che, Pat Heung,

Yuen Long

(RNTPC Paper No. A/YL-PH/846)


97. Ms Ivy C.W. Wong, STP/FSYLE, presented the application and covered the



- 53 -

(b) proposed temporary wholesale trade (food) for a period of five years;


9 of the Paper;





While the proposed wholesale trade use was not entirely in line with the

planning intention of the “Open Storage” (“OS”) zone, it was not

incompatible with the intended uses in the zone. Approval of the

application on a temporary basis for a period of five years would not

jeopardise the long-term planning intention of the “OS” zone. The

proposed development was not incompatible with the surrounding area.

Concerned government departments had no objection to or no adverse

comment on the application. Appropriate approval conditions were

recommended to address the technical requirements of the concerned

government departments. As there were 13 previous applications

approved for various temporary open storage or container trailer/tractors

uses, approval of the current application was in line with the Committee’s

previous decisions.






“(a) no vehicle is allowed to queue back to or reverse onto/from public road at

any time during the planning approval period;

- 54 -

(b) the submission of a drainage proposal within 6 months from the date of



(c) in relation to (b) above, the implementation of the drainage proposal within



(d) in relation to (c) above, the implemented drainage facilities on the site shall

be maintained at all times during the planning approval period;

(e) the submission of a fire service installations proposal within 6 months from

the date of planning approval to the satisfaction of the Director of Fire


(f) in relation to (e) above, the implementation of the fire service installations


satisfaction of the Director of Fire Services or of the TPB by 1.6.2021;

(g) if any of the above planning conditions (a) or (d) is not complied with



(h) if any of the above planning conditions (b), (c), (e) or (f) is not complied

with by the specified date, the approval hereby given shall cease to have

effect and shall on the same date be revoked without further notice.”


set out at Appendix IV of the Paper.

- 55 -

Agenda Item 30



A/YL-PH/847 Proposed Temporary Shop and Services (Vehicle Parts) with Ancillary

Storage and Office for a Period of 5 Years in “Open Storage” Zone,

Lots 861 S.A (Part) and 861 S.C (Part) in D.D. 111, Ha Che, Pat

Heung, Yuen Long

(RNTPC Paper No. A/YL-PH/847)


101. Ms Ivy C.W. Wong, STP/FSYLE, presented the application and covered the



(b) proposed temporary shop and services (vehicle parts) with ancillary storage

and office for a period of five years;


9 of the Paper;

(d) during the first three weeks of the statutory publication period, one

objecting public comment was received from a member of the Yuen Long

District Council. Major objection grounds were set out in paragraph 10 of

the Paper; and



Although the proposed development was not entirely in line with the

planning intention of the “Open Storage” (“OS”) zone, it was not

incompatible with the intended uses in the zone and surrounding land uses.

Temporary approval of the application for a period of five years would not

- 56 -

jeopardize the long-term planning intention of the “OS” zone.

Appropriate approval conditions were recommended to address the

technical requirements of the concerned government departments. The

site was the subject of a previous application (No. A/YL-PH/797) for

temporary shop and services (vehicle parts) (one-storey structure only)

approved in 2018, and the current application was for largely the same

applied use with a smaller area and increased total floor area, building

height and number of storeys. Regarding the public comment, the


were relevant.

102. In response to a Member’s enquiries on the height of the surrounding structures

and the scale of operation of the proposed use, Ms Ivy C.W. Wong, STP/FSYLE, made the

following main points:

(a) there was no building height restriction for the “OS” zone where the site

was located;

(b) the temporary structures in the surrounding area, as illustrated in the site

photos on Plan A-4 of the Paper, were of two storeys in height;

(c) according to the proposal submitted by the applicant, the proposed

development involved a four-storey temporary structure (about 15m) with a

total floor area of about 2,456m2; and

(d) the applicant intended to provide enclosed floor space for vehicle parts

retailer. The site was to serve as a vehicle parts retail hub to cater for the

demand from vehicle repair workshops in the Pat Heung area.


103. Three Members were concerned about the proposed building height and its

compatibility with the surroundings. The Chairman drew Members’ attention to the

following information in relation to the current application to facilitate Members’ discussion:

- 57 -

(a) the previous application was submitted by the same applicant for the same

use, with a building height of one storey (about 11m) and a larger site area

as compared with the current application;

(b) the planning permission obtained under the previous application in 2018

was still valid;

(c) concerned government departments had no objection to or adverse

comment on the proposed scale of development under the current

application; and

(d) prior approval from the Buildings Authority was required before

commencement of any building works on site.

104. A Member remarked that while the applicant had submitted a scheme with a

proposed four-storey structure to meet the operational needs, it was for the Committee to

assess whether the proposed development would be out-of-scale and incompatible with the

surrounding context.

105. The Committee noted from the aerial photo illustrated on Plan A-3 of the Paper

that the surrounding area was predominated by a mixture of open storage yards, warehouse,

workshop and unused/vacant land. Covered structures were commonly found in the area.

The previously approved application concerning the site involved a one-storey structure of

about 11m. Besides, an application (No. A/YL-PH/804) for proposed temporary wholesale

trade (food) use with a structure of about 18m, which was located to the south of the site, was

previously approved by the Committee in 2019.

106. Members in general considered that the current application with a proposed

building height of about 15m was acceptable as the 4m increase in building height as

compared with the previous approval was not substantial and the applied use was temporary

in nature. The building height of the proposed structure was also similar to that of the

nearby structures.


- 58 -

temporary basis for a period of 5 years until 1.9.2025 on the terms of the application as


“ (a) no vehicle is allowed to queue back to or reverse onto/from public road at


(b) the submission of a drainage proposal within 6 months from the date of



(c) in relation to (b) above, the implementation of the drainage proposal within



(d) in relation to (c) above, the implemented drainage facilities on the site shall


(e) the submission of a fire service installations proposal within 6 months from



(f) in relation to (e) above, the implementation of the fire service installations



(g) if any of the above planning conditions (a) or (d) is not complied with



(h) if any of the above planning conditions (b), (c), (e) or (f) is not complied




- 59 -


[Miss Winnie W.M. Ng arrived to join the meeting during the deliberation session.]

Agenda Item 31


[Open Meeting]

A/YL-NSW/274 Proposed Residential (Flat) and Community Hub (Shop and Services,

Eating Place, School, Place of Recreation, Sports or Culture and Public

Transport Terminus) Development in “Undetermined” Zone, Lots 592

S.C ss.1 S.A, 592 S.C ss.4 and 1252 S.C in D.D. 115, Tung Shing Lei,

Yuen Long

(RNTPC Paper No. A/YL-NSW/274)

109. The Committee noted that the consideration of the application had been

rescheduled.

Agenda Item 32


[Open Meeting]

A/YL-ST/574 Proposed Temporary Shop and Services (Retail Shops and Convenient

Store) for a Period of 3 Years in “Village Type Development” Zone,

Lots 3049 RP (Part) and 3050 RP (Part) in D.D.102 and Adjoining

Government Land, San Tin, Yuen Long

(RNTPC Paper No. A/YL-ST/574)






- 60 -









circumstances.

[The Chairman thanked Ms Ivy C.W. Wong, STP/FSYLE, for her attendance to answer

Members’ enquiries. She left the meeting at this point.]

Tuen Mun and Yuen Long West District

[Ms Jessica Y.C. Ho, Mr Simon P.H. Chan, Ms Bonnie K.C. Lee and Mr Steven Y.H. Siu,

Senior Town Planners/Tuen Mun and Yuen Long West (STPs/TMYLW), were invited to the

meeting at this point.]

Agenda Item 33


[Open Meeting]

A/TM-LTYY/401 Proposed Temporary Shop and Services for a Period of 3 Years in

“Village Type Development” Zone, Lot 3866 S.B in D.D. 124, Shun

Tat Street, Lam Tei, Tuen Mun

(RNTPC Paper No. A/TM-LTYY/401)




- 61 -











circumstances.

Agenda Item 34



A/TM-SKW/108 Renewal of Planning Approval for Temporary Shop and Services (Real

Estate Agency) for a Period of 3 Years in “Village Type Development”

Zone, Lot 638 RP in D.D. 375, So Kwun Wat, Tuen Mun

(RNTPC Paper No. A/TM-SKW/108)


114. Ms Jessica Y.C. Ho, STP/TMYLW, presented the application and covered the



(b) renewal of planning approval for temporary shop and services (real estate

agency) for a period of three years;


- 62 -

10 of the Paper;


comments were received, with two supportive comments from two village

representatives, and one objecting comment from a member of the Tuen

Mun District Council. Major objection grounds were set out in paragraph

11 of the Paper; and




34C in that there had been no major change in planning circumstances since

the last approval. Concerned government departments had no objection to

or no adverse comment on the application. Appropriate approval

conditions were recommended to minimise any possible nuisance and

address the technical requirements of concerned departments. Regarding

the public comments, the comments of government departments and

planning assessments above were relevant.






“(a) no operation between 7:00 p.m. and 10:00 a.m., as proposed by the

applicant, is allowed on the site during the planning approval period;

(b) no structure within 7m from the western boundary of the site, as proposed

by the applicant, is allowed at any time during the planning approval

period;

- 63 -

(c) no vehicle is allowed to queue back to or reverse onto/from public road at


(d) the existing fire service installations implemented on the site should be

maintained in an efficient working order at all times during the planning

approval period;

(e) the existing drainage facilities on the site shall be maintained at all times

during the planning approval period; and

(f) if any of the above planning conditions (a), (b), (c), (d) or (e) is not



further notice.”



Agenda Item 35



A/HSK/230 Proposed Temporary Reinforcing Steel Processing Workshop with

Ancillary Office for a Period of 3 Years in “Other Specified Uses”

annotated “Logistics Facility” Zone, Lot 1262 (Part) in D.D. 124, Ha

Tsuen, Yuen Long

(RNTPC Paper No. A/HSK/230)


118. Mr Simon P.H. Chan, STP/TMYLW, presented the application and covered the


- 64 -


(b) proposed temporary reinforcing steel processing workshop with ancillary

office for a period of three years;


8 of the Paper;

(d) during the first three weeks of the statutory publication period, one public

comment was received from an individual providing views. Major views

were set out in paragraph 9 of the Paper; and



Although the proposed development was not in line with the planning

intention of the “Other Specified Uses” annotated “Logistic Facility” zone,

the Project Manager (West), Civil Engineering and Development

Department had no objection to the proposed development for temporary

use. The proposed development was small in scale and not incompatible

with the surrounding uses. It could help meet some of the demand for

reinforced steels by the construction industry, especially during the

implementation of the Hung Shui Kiu/Ha Tsuen New Development Area

project. As such, sympathetic consideration might be given to the

application. There was no adverse comment on the application from

concerned government departments, except the Director of Environmental

Protection. Appropriate approval conditions were recommended to

address the concerns on the possible environmental nuisances generated by

the proposed development and technical requirements of the concerned

departments. Regarding the public comment, the comments of

government departments and planning assessments above were relevant.



- 65 -




“(a) no operation between 6:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m., as proposed by the applicant,






(d) the submission of a revised drainage proposal within 6 months from the



(e) in relation to (d) above, the implementation of the revised drainage proposal


the Director of Drainage Services or of the TPB by 1.6.2021;

(f) the implemented drainage facilities on the site shall be maintained at all

times during the planning approval period;

(g) the submission of a fire service installations proposal within 6 months from



(h) in relation to (g) above, the implementation of the fire service installations



(i) if any of the above planning conditions (a), (b), (c) or (f) is not complied

- 66 -

with during the planning approval period, the approval hereby given shall

cease to have effect and shall be revoked immediately without further

notice; and

(j) if any of the above planning conditions (d), (e), (g) or (h) is not complied




set out at Appendix III of the Paper.

Agenda Item 36


[Open Meeting]

A/HSK/231 Proposed Temporary Warehouse and Open Storage of New Vehicles

(Private Cars, Taxis, Light Goods Vehicles and Light Buses) for a

Period of 3 Years in “Other Specified Uses” annotated “Enterprise and

Technology Park” Zone, Various Lots in D.D. 124 and Adjoining

Government Land, Hung Shui Kiu, Yuen Long



25.8.2020 deferment of consideration of the application for one month in order to allow time

for concerned departments to review his submission. It was the first time that the applicant

requested deferment of the application.







- 67 -


applicant that one month was allowed for preparation of the submission of the further


circumstances.

Agenda Item 37



A/HSK/232 Renewal of Planning Approval for Temporary Open Storage of Trucks

and Goods Compartments of Dump Trucks for a Period of 3 Years in

“Residential (Group A) 3” Zone, Lots 799 (Part) and 800 (Part) in D.D.

125 and Lot 3300 (Part) in D.D. 129, Ha Tsuen, Yuen Long



124. Mr Simon P.H. Chan, STP/TMYLW, presented the application and covered the



(b) renewal of planning approval for temporary open storage of trucks and

goods compartments of dump trucks for a period of three years;


10 of the Paper;





- 68 -

applied use could be tolerated for a further period of three years based on

the assessments set out in paragraph 12 of the Paper. The application was

generally in line with the Town Planning Board Guidelines No. 34C (TPB

PG-No. 34C) in that there had been no major change in planning

circumstances since the last approval and TPB PG-No. 13F in that the site

fell within the Hung Shui Kiu New Development Area and previous

planning approval had been given. All the approval conditions under the

last approved application had been complied with. As there was no major

change in planning circumstances since the last planning approval,

sympathetic consideration might be given to the current application.

Appropriate approval conditions were recommended to address the possible

environmental nuisances and technical requirements of the concerned

government departments. Regarding the public comment, the comments

of government departments and planning assessments above were relevant.




temporary basis for a period of 3 years and be renewed from 23.9.2020 to 22.9.2023, on the

terms of the application as submitted to the Town Planning Board (TPB) and subject to the

following conditions:

“ (a) no operation between 11:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m., as proposed by the




(c) no repair and workshop activity, as proposed by the applicant, is allowed on

the site at any time during the planning approval period;

(d) no public vehicle park, as proposed by the applicant, is allowed on the site

- 69 -

at any time during the planning approval period;

(e) the existing boundary fencing on site shall be maintained at all times during


(f) no vehicle is allowed to queue back to or reverse onto/from public road at


(g) the landscape planting on the site shall be maintained at all times during the


(h) the existing drainage facilities on site shall be maintained at all times during


(i) the existing fire services installations shall be maintained in efficient


(j) the submission of a condition record of existing drainage facilities within

3 months from the date of commencement of the renewal planning approval

to the satisfaction of the Director of Drainage Services or of the TPB by

23.12.2020;

(k) if any of the above planning conditions (a), (b), (c), (d), (e), (f), (g), (h) or (i)

is not complied with during the planning approval period, the approval

hereby given shall cease to have effect and shall be revoked immediately

without further notice; and

(l) if the above planning condition (j) is not complied with by the specified





- 70 -

Agenda Item 38



A/YL-HTF/1106 Proposed Temporary Place of Recreation, Sports or Culture (Hobby

Farm) for a Period of 5 Years and Land Filling in “Agriculture” Zone,

Lots 420 RP, 420 S.A, 421, 422 (Part), 424, 427, 428 S.A, 428 RP, 429

(Part), 430 (Part) and 431 (Part) in D.D. 128, Lau Fau Shan, Yuen

Long

(RNTPC Paper No. A/YL-HTF/1106)


128. Ms Bonnie K.C. Lee, STP/TMYLW, presented the application and covered the



(b) proposed temporary place of recreation, sports or culture (hobby farm) for a

period of five years and filling of land;


9 of the Paper;

(d) during the first three weeks of the statutory publication period, five

objecting public comments were received from Hong Kong Bird Watching

Society, Kadoorie Farm and Botanic Garden, World Wide Fund for Nature

Hong Kong, Designing Hong Kong Limited and an individual. Major




The proposal involving agriculture/farming use and filling of land was

- 71 -

considered not in conflict with the planning intention of the “Agriculture”

(“AGR”) zone and the proposed development was not incompatible with

the surrounding areas. Concerned government departments had no

objection to or no adverse comment on the application and appropriate

approval conditions were recommended to address the technical

requirements of the concerned departments. The Committee had approved

two similar applications for hobby farm use (No. A/YL-HTF/1090 and

1091) for a period of three years within the same “AGR” zone, and

approval of the current application was in line with the previous decisions

of the Committee. Regarding the public comments, the comments of


129. In response to two Member’s enquiries regarding land filling and treatment of the

site after the approval period, Ms Bonnie K.C. Lee, STP/TMYLW, made the following main

points:

(a) according to the definitions of terms, land filling referred to the depositing

or placing of earth, gravel or any other substances on land, which resulted

in an elevation of ground level. According to the Notes of the OZP for the

concerned “AGR” zone, except laying of soil not exceeding 1.2m in

thickness for cultivation, any filling of land required planning permission

from the Board. According to the applicant, about 22% of the site would

be hard paved with a depth of not more than 0.2m for site formation of

structures, vehicle manoeuvring space and footpath. Hence, planning

application was required;

(b) according to the applicant, about 60% of the site area was for planting use

in the hobby farm, and about 22% proposed to be hard paved for the

construction of eight temporary structures, vehicle manoeuvring space and

footpath. For the current application, a substantial portion of the land

(more than half of the site) was for agriculture use. The applicant had also

provided information to justify the need to hard pave the area concerned;

- 72 -

(c) the site was currently hard paved and were partly used for open storage of

construction materials. Implementation of the proposal required removal

of the existing hard paving/soil/gravel and filling of soil for the farming use.

An approval condition was recommended requiring the applicant to

reinstate the site to an amenity area upon expiry of the planning permission;

and

(d) the site was subject to enforcement action against unauthorised

development involving filling of land and a reinstatement notice had been

served.


130. Two Members expressed that the proposal was considered acceptable. Despite

the fact that the site was subject to enforcement action, the unauthorised development had

been discontinued and the site had been partially reinstated, they considered that the

application could be considered favourably.




“ (a) no operation between 6:00 p.m. to 9:00 a.m., as proposed by the applicant,


(b) no medium or heavy goods vehicle exceeding 5.5 tonnes, including

container tractor/trailer, is allowed to be parked/stored on or enter/exit the

site, as proposed by the applicant, during the planning approval period;



(d) the submission of a drainage proposal within 6 months from the date of


- 73 -


(e) in relation to (d) above, the implementation of the drainage proposal within



(f) the implemented drainage facilities shall be maintained at all times during


(g) all existing trees within the site shall be maintained in good condition


(h) the submission of a fire service installations proposal within 6 months from



(i) in relation to (h) above, the implementation of the fire service installations



(j) if any of the above planning conditions (a), (b), (c), (f) or (g) is not



further notice;

(k) if any of the above planning conditions (d), (e), (h) or (i) is not complied


effect and shall on the same date be revoked without further notice; and

(l) upon expiry of the planning permission, the reinstatement of the site to an

amenity area to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning or of the TPB.”



- 74 -

Agenda Item 39



A/YL-LFS/365 Proposed Filling of Land for Permitted Agricultural Use in “Village

Type Development” Zone, Lots 2818, 2822 and 2823 in D.D. 129 and

Adjoining Government Land, Sha Kong Wai, Yuen Long

(RNTPC Paper No. A/YL-LFS/365)


133. Ms Bonnie K.C. Lee, STP/TMYLW, presented the application and covered the



(b) proposed filling of land for permitted agricultural use;


9 of the Paper;

(d) during the first three weeks of the statutory publication period, four

objecting public comments were received from villagers and an individual.




The proposed filling of land for agricultural use was considered not

incompatible with the surrounding area. While the Director of Food and

Environmental Hygiene had reservation on the application, other concerned

government departments had no objection to or no adverse comment on the

application. Appropriate approval conditions were recommended to

address the technical requirements of the concerned departments. The

Committee had approved a similar application for the same use in 2015 to

- 75 -

the immediate south of the site within the same “Village Type

Development” zone. Approval of the current application was in line with

the previous decision of the Committee. Regarding the public comments,

the comments of government departments and planning assessments above

were relevant.








“(a) no part of the site shall be filled other than soil to a depth exceeding 1.5 m,

as proposed by the applicant;

(b) no part of the site shall be filled to a level higher than the adjoining area;

(c) no land filling works shall be carried out on the hard-paved area within the

site;

(d) the submission of a drainage proposal including drainage mitigation

measures before commencement of land filling works on the site to the

satisfaction of the Director of Drainage Services or of the TPB;

(e) the implementation of the drainage proposal including drainage mitigation

measures identified therein upon completion of the land filling works on the

site to the satisfaction of the Director of Drainage Services or of the TPB;

and

(f) if any of the above planning conditions (d) or (e) is not complied with

- 76 -

before commencement or upon completion of the land filling works,

respectively, the approval hereby given shall cease to have effect and shall

be revoked immediately without further notice.”



[Mr Raymond K.W. Lee, the Chairman, left the meeting at this point.]

137. Members noted that the Chairman had to attend an urgent meeting and was

unable to chair the remaining part of the meeting. Mr Stephen L.H. Liu, the Vice-chairman,

took over the chairmanship at this point.

Agenda Item 40



A/YL/264 Proposed House (New Territories Exempted House - Small House)

in “Comprehensive Development Area” Zone, Tai Kiu Lot 77 RP in

D.D.120, Tai Kiu Tsuen, Yuen Long

(RNTPC Paper No. A/YL/264)


138. Mr Steven Y.H. Siu, STP/TMYLW, presented the application and covered the



(b) proposed house (New Territories Exempted House (NTEH) - Small House);


11 and Appendix V of the Paper;

- 77 -


comments were received from the Indigenous Inhabitants Representative

and an individual providing views. Major views were set out in paragraph

12 of the Paper; and



While the proposed development was not in line with the planning intention

of the “Comprehensive Development Area” (“CDA”) zone, the proposal

was only for redevelopment of an existing village house, which was small

in scale and the site had a building status for house use under the lease.

There was currently no valid planning approval/Master Layout Plan

covering the subject “CDA” zone nor any known

development/redevelopment proposal for the area. Hence, the proposed

development would not significantly jeopardise the long-term development

of the subject “CDA” zone. The proposed development was considered

not incompatible with the surrounding area. Regarding the Interim

Criteria for Consideration of Application for NTEH/Small House in the

New Territories, the site and the footprint of the proposed Small House fell

entirely within the ‘village environ’ of Tai Kiu. As there was no “Village

Type Development” zone for Tai Kiu, the 10-year Small House demand

forecast could not be met. As such, sympathetic consideration could be

given to the current application based on its individual circumstances.


comment on the application. Regarding the public comments, the


were relevant.



- 78 -





permission was renewed. The permission was subject to the following condition:

“ the provision of septic tank, as proposed by the applicant, at a location to the

satisfaction of the Director of Lands or of the TPB.”



Agenda Item 41



A/YL-TT/491 Temporary Public Vehicle Park for Private Cars and Light Goods

Vehicles for a Period of 3 Years in “Village Type Development” Zone,

Lot 1213 (Part) in D.D. 117, Tai Tong Tsuen, Yuen Long

(RNTPC Paper No. A/YL-TT/491A)





(b) temporary public vehicle park for private cars and light goods vehicles for a

period of three years;


9 of the Paper;

- 79 -






Although the applied use was not entirely in line with the planning intention

of the “Village Type Development” (“V”) zone, the proposal could help

meet the parking demand in the area. Approval of the application for a

temporary period of three years would not frustrate the long-term planning

intention of the area. The applied use was considered not incompatible

with the surrounding area. Concerned government departments had no

objection to or no adverse comments on the application. Appropriate

approval conditions were recommended to minimise any potential nuisance

and address the technical requirements of concerned departments. While

the previous approval at the site for the same use was revoked due to

non-compliance with approval conditions, the applicant of the current

application, who claimed to be the new tenant of the site, submitted

landscaping, drainage and fire service installations (FSIs) proposals, of

which the FSIs proposal was accepted by the Director of Fire Services.

Hence, sympathetic consideration might be given to the application. One

similar application within the same “V” zone had been approved by the

Committee, approval of the subject application was generally in line with

the Committee’s previous decision. Regarding the public comment, the


were relevant.





- 80 -


“ (a) only private cars and light goods vehicles, as defined in the Road Traffic

Ordinance, are allowed to enter/be parked on the site, as proposed by the

applicant, at any time during the planning approval period;

(b) no vehicle without valid licences issued under the Road Traffic Ordinance

is allowed to be parked/stored on the site at any time during the planning

approval period;

(c) no open storage, vehicle repairing, loading and unloading, dismantling or

other workshop activities, as proposed by the applicant, are allowed on the

site at any time during the planning approval period;

(d) no vehicle is allowed to queue back to or reverse onto/from public road at


(e) the provision of boundary fencing on the site within 3 months from the date

of planning approval to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning or of the

TPB by 1.12.2020;

(f) the submission of a run-in/out proposal within 3 months from the date of

the planning approval to the satisfaction of the Director of Highways or of

the TPB by 1.12.2020;

(g) in relation to (f) above, the implementation of the run-in/out proposal


the Director of Highways or of the TPB by 1.3.2021;

(h) the submission of a revised drainage proposal within 3 months from the



(i) in relation to (h) above, the implementation of the revised drainage proposal

- 81 -


the Director of Drainage Services or of the TPB by 1.3.2021;

(j) in relation to (i) above, the implemented drainage facilities on the site shall


(k) the implementation of the accepted fire service installations proposal within


Director of Fire Services or of the TPB by 1.3.2021;

(l) if any of the above planning conditions (a), (b), (c), (d) or (j) is not



further notice; and

(m) if any of the above planning conditions (e), (f), (g), (h), (i) or (k) is not


to have effect and shall on the same date be revoked without further

notice.”



Agenda Item 42



A/YL-TT/497 Renewal of Planning Approval for Temporary Canteen for a Period of

3 Years in “Village Type Development” Zone, Lots 1187 S.O (Part),

1187 S.Q (Part) and 1187 S.R (Part) in D.D. 117 and Adjoining

Government Land, Shap Pat Heung, Yuen Long

(RNTPC Paper No. A/YL-TT/497)

- 82 -





(b) renewal of planning approval for temporary canteen for a period of three

years;


10 of the Paper;






34C (TPB PG-No. 34C) in that there had been no major change in planning

circumstances since the last approval. The application was also generally

in line with the TPB PG-No. 15A in that the eating place was located at the

fringe of Tai Tong Tsuen and abutted Tai Tong Shan Road. Concerned

government departments had no objection to or no adverse comment on the

application. Appropriate approval conditions were recommended to

address the technical requirements of the concerned departments.






- 83 -

“ (a) no operation between 7:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m., as proposed by the applicant,


(b) no medium or heavy goods vehicles exceeding 5.5 tonnes, including

container tractors/trailers, as defined in the Road Traffic Ordinance, as

proposed by the applicant, is allowed to be parked/stored on or enter/exit




(d) the existing drainage facilities on the site should be maintained at all times


(e) all existing trees within the site shall be maintained at all times during the


(f) the submission of a condition record of the existing drainage facilities on

the site within 3 months from the date of commencement of the renewed



(g) the submission of a fire service installations proposal within 6 months from

the date of commencement of the renewed planning approval to the


(h) in relation to (g) above, the implementation of the fire service installations

proposal within 9 months from the date of commencement of the renewed

planning approval to the satisfaction of the Director of Fire Services or of

the TPB by 1.6.2021;

(i) if any of the above planning conditions (a), (b), (c), (d) or (e) is not


- 84 -


further notice; and

(j) if any of the above planning conditions (f), (g) or (h) is not complied with

by the specified date, the approval hereby given shall cease to have effect

and shall on the same date be revoked without further notice.”



Agenda Item 43



A/YL-TT/499 Renewal of Planning Approval for Temporary Forklift Training Centre

with Ancillary Facilities for a Period of 3 Years in “Agriculture” Zone,

Lots 2270 S.A (Part), 2273 (Part), 2274 (Part) and 2275 in D.D. 118

and Adjoining Government Land, Sung Shan New Village, Tai Tong,

Yuen Long

(RNTPC Paper No. A/YL-TT/499)





(b) renewal of planning approval for temporary forklift training centre with

ancillary facilities for a period of three years;


10 of the Paper;

- 85 -






assessments set out in paragraph 12 of the Paper. The application was in

line with the Town Planning Board Guidelines No. 34C in that there had

been no major change in planning circumstances since the last approval.


comment on the application. Appropriate approval conditions were

recommended to address the technical requirements of concerned

departments. Regarding the public comment, the comments of











(c) no forklift truck is allowed to be driven into/out from the site, as proposed

by the applicant, at any time during the planning approval period;

(d) no workshop activities, as proposed by the applicant, is allowed on the site

- 86 -

at any time during the planning approval period;

(e) no medium or heavy goods vehicles exceeding 5.5 tonnes, including

container tractors/trailers, as defined in the Road Traffic Ordinance, as

proposed by the applicant, is allowed to be parked/stored on or enter/exit


(f) no vehicle is allowed to queue back to or reverse onto/from public road at


(g) all existing trees within the site shall be maintained at all times during the


(h) the existing drainage facilities on the site shall be maintained at all times


(i) the submission of a condition record of the existing drainage facilities on

the site within 3 months from the date of commencement of the renewed



(j) the existing fire service installations implemented on the site should be


approval period;

(k) if any of the above planning conditions (a), (b), (c), (d), (e), (f), (g), (h) or (j)

is not complied with during the planning approval period, the approval



(l) if the above planning condition (i) is not complied with by the specified



- 87 -



Agenda Item 44



A/YL-TYST/1005 Temporary Open Storage of Construction Machinery, Construction

Materials and Ancillary Office and Repair Workshop for a Period of 3

Years in “Undetermined” Zone, Lots 2387 RP (Part), 2388 (Part), 2389

(Part), 2391 (Part), 2408 (Part), 2411 S.AB & C (Part), 2412 (Part),

2414 (Part) and 2415 (Part) in D.D. 120, Tong Yan San Tsuen, Yuen

Long

(RNTPC Paper No. A/YL-TYST/1005A)





(b) temporary open storage of construction machinery, construction materials

and ancillary office and repair workshop for a period of three years;


10 of the Paper;





- 88 -

assessments set out in paragraph 12 of the Paper. Both the Chief

Engineer/Cross-Boundary Infrastructure and Development, PlanD and the

Project Manager (West), Civil Engineering and Development Department

had no objection to the application. Approval of the application on a

temporary basis of three years would not jeopardise the long-term

development of the area. The proposed development was generally not

incompatible with the surrounding uses and was in line with the Town

Planning Board Guidelines No. 13F. While the planning permission under

the last application (No. A/YL-TYST/957) submitted by the same applicant

was revoked due to non-compliance with approval conditions on the

submission and implementation of Fire Service Installations (FSIs)

proposals, FSIs had been submitted under the current application and the

Director of Fire Services had no in-principle objection to the application.

As such, sympathetic consideration might be given to the application.

Shorter compliance periods were recommended for the current application

in order to closely monitor the progress on compliance with associated

approval conditions. There was no adverse comment on the application

from concerned government departments, except the Director of

Environmental Protection (DEP). DEP did not support the application as

there were sensitive receivers in the vicinity and environmental nuisances

were expected. Relevant approval conditions were recommended to

minimise any potential environmental nuisance generated by the proposed

development and address the technical requirements of the concerned

departments. Given that ten previous approvals for open storage uses had

been granted to the site and 20 similar applications had been approved since

2015, approval of the current application was generally in line with the

Committee’s previous decisions.





- 89 -






(c) no storage and handling (including loading and unloading) of electrical

appliances and electronic/computer parts (including cathode-ray tubes), as

proposed by the applicant, are allowed on the site at any time during the


(d) no heavy goods vehicles exceeding 24 tonnes, including container

tractors/trailers, as defined in the Road Traffic Ordinance are allowed to be

parked/stored on or enter/exit the site, as proposed by the applicant, at any

time during the planning approval period;

(e) no vehicle is allowed to queue back to or reverse onto/from public road at


(f) all existing trees within the site shall be maintained at all times, as proposed

by the applicant, during the planning approval period;

(g) the existing boundary fencing on the site shall be maintained at all times


(h) the existing drainage facilities on the site shall be maintained at all times


(i) the submission of a condition record of the existing drainage facilities on

the site within 3 months from the date of planning approval to the

satisfaction of the Director of Drainage Services or of the TPB by

1.12.2020;

- 90 -

(j) the provision of fire extinguisher(s) with valid fire certificate (FS 251)

within 6 weeks from the date of planning approval to the satisfaction of the


(k) the submission of a revised fire service installations proposal within



(l) in relation to (k) above, the implementation of the fire service installations



(m) if any of the above planning conditions (a), (b), (c), (d), (e), (f), (g) or (h) is

not complied with during the planning approval period, the approval hereby


further notice; and

(n) if any of the above planning conditions (i), (j), (k) or (l) is not complied





- 91 -

Agenda Item 45



A/YL-TYST/1030 Temporary Warehouse for Storage of Food and Electronic Goods for a

Period of 3 Years in “Undetermined” Zone, Lots 1343 (Part), 1344

(Part), 1345 (Part), 1349 (Part), 1351 (Part), 1353 (Part) in D.D. 119

and Adjoining Government Land, Tong Yan San Tsuen, Yuen Long

(RNTPC Paper No. A/YL-TYST/1030)





(b) temporary warehouse for storage of food and electronic goods for a period

of three years;


9 of the Paper;


comments were received, with one objecting comment from a member of

the Yuen Long District Council and the other from an individual providing

views. Major objection grounds were set out in paragraph 10 of the Paper;

and



assessments set out in paragraph 11 of the Paper. The proposal was not in

conflict with the planning intention of the “Undetermined” (“U”) zone.

Whilst the site fell partly within areas zoned as “District Open Space” and

- 92 -

“Residential - Zone 2 (with Commercial)” on the Revised Recommended

Outline Development Plan of Yuen Long South, both the Chief

Engineer/Cross-Boundary Infrastructure and Development, PlanD and the

Project Manager (West), Civil Engineering and Development Department

had no objection to the application. Approval of the application on a

temporary basis of three years would not jeopardise the long-term

development of the area. The proposal was generally not incompatible

with the surrounding uses in the subject “U” zone. The application was

generally in line with the Town Planning Board Guidelines No. 13F in that

the site fell within Category 1 areas. The Director of Environmental

Protection did not support the application as there were sensitive receivers

of residential use in the vicinity of the site. Appropriate approval

conditions were recommended to minimise any potential environmental

nuisance on the surrounding areas and address the technical requirements of

the concerned departments. Given that one previous approval for

warehouse use had been granted to the site and 72 similar applications had

been approved in the “U” zone since 2015, approval of the current

application was generally in line with the Committee’s previous decisions.











- 93 -


(c) no repairing, dismantling, spraying, cleansing, other workshop activities

and storage or handling (including loading and unloading) of used electrical

appliances, computer/electronic parts (including cathode-ray tubes) or

electronic waste, as proposed by the applicant, shall be carried out on the


(d) no vehicle is allowed to queue back to or reverse onto/from public road at


(e) the existing drainage facilities on the site shall be maintained at all times


(f) the submission of a condition record of the existing drainage facilities on

the site within 3 months from the date of planning approval to the

satisfaction of the Director of Drainage Services or of the TPB by

1.12.2020;

(g) the implementation of the accepted fire service installations proposal within



(h) if any of the above planning conditions (a), (b), (c), (d) or (e) is not



further notice; and

(i) if any of the above planning conditions (f) or (g) is not complied with by

the specified date, the approval hereby given shall cease to have effect and

shall on the same date be revoked without further notice.”



- 94 -

Agenda Item 46


[Open Meeting]

A/YL-TYST/1032 Temporary Warehouse for Storage of Construction Materials and

Electrical Goods for a Period of 3 Years in “Undetermined” Zone, Lots

2720 RP (Part), 2722 RP (Part), 2723 (Part), 2724 (Part), 2725, 2726,

2727 (Part), 2735 (Part) and 2736 RP (Part) in D.D. 120, Yuen Long




for preparation of submission of the fire service installations proposal. It was the first time

that the applicant requested deferment of the application.










circumstances.

- 95 -

Agenda Item 47


[Open Meeting]

A/YL-TYST/1034 Temporary Warehouse for Storage of Construction Materials and

Electronic Goods for a Period of 3 Years in “Undetermined” Zone, Lot

1368 (Part) in D.D. 119 and Adjoining Government Land, Yuen Long




for preparation of submission of the fire service installations proposal. It was the first time

that the applicant requested deferment of the application.










circumstances.

- 96 -

Agenda Item 48


[Open Meeting]

A/YL-TYST/1035 Proposed Temporary Public Vehicle Park (excluding Container Vehicle

and Heavy Goods Vehicle) for a Period of 3 Years in “Residential

(Group B) 1” and “Residential (Group D)” Zones, Various Lots in D.D.

121, Tong Yan San Tsuen, Yuen Long















circumstances.

- 97 -

Agenda Item 49



A/YL-TYST/1036 Renewal of Planning Approval for Temporary Open Storage of

Construction Machinery and Material for a Period of 3 Years in

“Undetermined” Zone, Various Lots in D.D. 120 and Adjoining

Government Land, Shan Ha Tsuen, Yuen Long






(b) renewal of planning approval for temporary open storage of construction

machinery and material for a period of three years;


10 of the Paper;






assessments set out in paragraph 12 of the Paper. The application was

generally in line with the Town Planning Board Guidelines No. 13F (TPB

PG-No. 13F) in that the site fell within the Yuen Long South Development

Area and previous planning approvals for similar open storage use had been

given. The application was also in line with the TPB PG-No. 34C in that

- 98 -

approval of the application would not pre-empt the long-term development

of the site. Concerned government departments had no objection to or no

adverse comment on the application. Appropriate approval conditions

were recommended to address any possible environmental nuisance and

technical requirements of concerned departments. Regarding the public

comment, the comments of government departments and planning



[Mr Y.S. Wong left the meeting at this point.]



temporary basis for a period of 3 years from 27.9.2020 to 26.9.2023, on the terms of the

application as submitted to the Town Planning Board (TPB) and subject to the following

conditions:

“(a) no operation between 11:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m., as proposed by the


(b) no operation on Sundays or public holidays, as proposed by the applicant, is

allowed on the site during the planning approval period;

(c) no repairing, dismantling, spraying, cleansing, other workshop activities

and storage or handling (including loading and unloading) of used electrical

appliances, computer/electronic parts (including cathode-ray tubes) or

electronic waste, as proposed by the applicant, shall be carried out on the


(d) no heavy goods vehicles exceeding 24 tonnes, including container

tractors/trailers, as defined in the Road Traffic Ordinance, as proposed by

the applicant, is allowed to be parked/stored on or enter/exit the site at any

- 99 -




(f) all existing trees within the site shall be maintained at all times during the


(g) the existing boundary fencing on the site shall be maintained at all times


(h) the existing fire services installations shall be maintained in efficient


(i) the submission of a revised drainage proposal within 6 months from the

date of commencement of the renewed planning approval to the satisfaction

of the Director of Drainage Services or of the TPB by 27.3.2021;

(j) in relation to (i) above, the implementation of the revised drainage proposal

within 9 months from the date of commencement of the renewed planning

approval to the satisfaction of the Director of Drainage Services or of the

TPB by 27.6.2021;

(k) in relation to (j) above, the implemented drainage facilities on the site shall


(l) if any of the above planning conditions (a), (b), (c), (d), (e), (f), (g), (h) or

(k) is not complied with during the planning approval period, the approval



(m) if any of the above planning conditions (i) or (j) is not complied with by the

specified date, the approval hereby given shall cease to have effect and shall

on the same date be revoked without further notice.”

- 100 -



Agenda Item 50



A/YL-TYST/1037 Proposed Temporary Warehouse for Storage of Furniture, Electronic

Goods and Construction Materials for a Period of 3 Years in

“Undetermined” Zone, Lots 1449 (Part), 1450 (Part), 1453, 1454

(Part), 1458 (Part) and 1459 (Part) in D.D. 119, Yuen Long






(b) proposed temporary warehouse for storage of furniture, electronic goods

and construction materials for a period of three years;


9 of the Paper;


comments were received, with two objecting comments from a member of

the Yuen Long District Council and a village representative of Muk Kiu

Tau Tsuen, and one from an individual providing views. Major objection

grounds were set out in paragraph 10 of the Paper; and

- 101 -


proposed use could be tolerated for a period of three years based on the

assessments set out in paragraph 11 of the Paper. Whilst the development

was not in line with the planning intention of the “Open Space” (“O”) zone

on the extant Outline Zoning Plan (OZP), the Project Manager (West), Civil

Engineering and Development Department had no objection to the

application as the site was not expected to be resumed within the next three

years for Stage 2 Phase 2 Yuen Long South Development. Approval of

the application on a temporary basis of three years would not jeopardise the

long-term development of the area. The proposed development was

generally not incompatible with the surrounding uses. There was no

adverse comment on the application from concerned government

departments, except the Director of Environmental Protection (DEP).

DEP did not support the application as there was a sensitive receiver in the

vicinity and environmental nuisances were expected. Relevant approval

conditions were recommended to minimise any potential environmental

nuisance and other technical requirements. Given that three similar

applications had been approved in the “O” zone since 2015, approval of the

current application was in line with the Committee’s previous decisions.



173. In response to a Member’s enquiry, Mr Steven Y.H. Siu, STP/TMYLW,

explained that the site previously fell within an area zoned “Undetermined” on the approved

Tong Yan San Tsuen OZP No. S/YL-TYST/12 at the time when the application was

submitted. The site had subsequently been rezoned to “O” and an area shown as ‘Road’ on

the draft Tong Yan San Tsuen OZP No. S/YL-TYST/13 gazetted in July 2020.





- 102 -





(c) no dismantling, cleaning, repairing, spraying, other workshop activities and

storage of used electronic goods and recyclable materials, as proposed by

the applicant, shall be carried out on the site at any time during the planning

approval period;

(d) no heavy goods vehicle exceeding 24 tonnes, including container

tractors/trailers, as defined in the Road Traffic Ordinance, are allowed to be

parked/stored on or enter/exit the site, as proposed by the applicant, at any




(f) all existing trees within the site shall be maintained at all times during the


(g) the implementation of the accepted drainage proposal within 6 months from

the date of planning approval to the satisfaction of the Director of Drainage


(h) in relation to (g) above, the implemented drainage facilities on the site shall


(i) the submission of a fire service installations proposal within 6 months from



(j) in relation to (i) above, the implementation of the fire service installations

- 103 -



(k) if any of the above planning conditions (a), (b), (c), (d), (e), (f) or (h) is not



further notice; and

(l) if any of the above planning conditions (g), (i) or (j) is not complied with by

the specified date, the approval hereby given shall cease to have effect and

shall on the same date be revoked without further notice.”



Agenda Item 51


[Open Meeting]

A/YL-TYST/1038 Temporary Open Storage and Warehouse for Storage of Furniture,

Exhibition Materials, Construction Materials/Machinery and

Household Detergent for a Period of 3 Years in “Undetermined” Zone,

Lots 1198 S.C (Part), 1198 S.D (Part), 1198 S.E (Part), 1198 S.G

(Part), 1201 (Part), 1202 RP (Part), 1210 S.F RP (Part), 1225 (Part),

1226 (Part), 1238 (Part), 1239 (Part) and 1252 (Part) in D.D. 119, Tong

Yan San Tsuen, Yuen Long






- 104 -










circumstances.

[The Chairman thanked Ms Jessica Y.C. Ho, Mr Simon P.H. Chan, Ms Bonnie K.C. Lee and

Mr Steven Y.H. Siu, STPs/TMYLW, for their attendance to answer Members’ enquiries.

They left the meeting at this point.]

Agenda Item 52

Any Other Business

178. There being no other business, the meeting was closed at 4:50 p.m.

minutes of 653rd meeting of the rural and new town ......town planning board minutes of 653rd...

Documents